HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnalysisANALYSIS
MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT
for
LIMA
located at approximately
2919 and 2937 Biscayne Boulevard and 330 NE 30th Street
CASE NUMBER: 2006-001
Pursuant to Ordinance 11000, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami,
Florida, the subject proposal for Lima project (MU-2005-037) has been reviewed to al-
low a Major Use Special Permit per Articles 5, 9, 13 and 17, located at approximately
2919 and 2937 Biscayne Boulevard, and 330 NE 30th Street, Miami, Florida, to con-
struct an approximate 473-foot, 41-story high mixed use structure to be comprised of
approximately 207 total multifamily residential units with recreational amenities; ap-
proximately 7,544 square feet of retail space; in addition to existing 30,430 sq. ft. (office)
and 10,150 sq. ft. (retail) uses; and approximately 363 total parking spaces; providing
for certain floor area ratio ("FAR") bonuses.
This Permit also includes the following requests:
MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMITS
MUSP, as per Article 17, Section 1701(1), for development of 207 residential units;
MUSP, as per Article 17, Section 1701(8) any increased development bonus pursu-
ant to Article 9, Section 914, a development bonus of 51,954,50 square feet of addi-
tional Floor Area, and to pay into Affordable Housing Trust Fund an amount of
$12.40 per square feet equal to $ 644,235.80;
MUSP, as per Article 5, Section 502, PUD districts; to increase the floor area by
twenty percent (20%), 41,563.60 square feet.
Per City Code, Chapter 36-6, request for waiver of noise ordinance for construction
equipment and exception of its operation hours other than permitted periods of time
while under construction.
The Major Use encompasses the following Special Permits:
CLASS II PERMITS
CLASS 1l SPECIAL PERMIT as per Article 6, Section 620.3.1, for development of
new construction and exterior improvements within the SD-20/ SD-20.1;
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 4, Section 401, to allow construction
fence and covered walkway;
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 4, Section 401, for signage approval;
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 4, Section 401 to allow for outdoor eat-
ing areas and outdoor cafes;
CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 908.2 for access from a public
street roadway with driveway greater than twenty five feet in width;
CLASS I1 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 920.1, to allow a trailer(s) for
construction and other temporary offices such as leasing and sales.
Page 1 of 6
CLASS I SPECIAL PERMITS
CLASS 1 SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 906.9, to allow for a special
event namely a ground breaking ceremony;
CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 918.2, for parking and staging
of construction during construction;
CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 925.3.8, to allow development)
construction/rental signage;
CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT, as per Article 9, Section 920.1, to allow a construction
trailer and watchman's quarters.
REQUEST for applicable MUSP conditions to be satisfied at the time of shell permit
instead of at issuance of foundation permit:
a) The requirement to record in the Public Records a Declaration of Covenants
and Restrictions providing that the ownership, operation and maintenance of all common
areas and facilities will be by the property owner or a mandatory property owner
association; and
b) The requirement to record in the Public Records a unity of title or covenant in
lieu of unity of title.
Pursuant to Articles 5, 9, 13 and 17 of Zoning Ordinance 11000, approval of the
requested Major Use Special Permit shall be considered sufficient for the subordinate
permits requested and referenced above as well as any other special approvals required
by the City which may be required to carry out the requested plans.
in determining the appropriateness of the proposed project, the Planning
Department has referred this project to the Large Scale Development Committee
(LSDC) and the Planning Internal Design Review Committee for additional input
and recommendations; the following findings have been made:
• It is found that the proposed development project will benefit the area by creating
additional residential opportunities in the Wynwood/Edgewater NET District, located
at the southeast corner of Biscayne Boulevard and NE 30th Street.
• It is found that the subject property is located in the "Broadmoor" Plat within the
Edgewater neighborhood of the City.
• It is found that pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, the
existing zoning designation for the property is C-1 (Restricted Commercial) with SD-
20 (Edgewater Overlay) and SD-20.1 (Biscayne Boulevard Edgewater Overlay).
• It is found that pursuant to the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan of the City of
Miami, Florida, the existing Future Land Use category for the property is "Restricted
Commercial".
• It is found that the proposed project is not located along a Primary Pedestrian
Pathway.
Page 2 of 6
• It is found that the proposed project is not located within an Archeological
Conservation area.
• It is found that the residential density of the project (207 units at 150 units per acre)
is at the maximum 207 units (150 units per acre) on the 1.38± net acre site.
It is found that the south portion of the property is the location of the existing 3-story,
40,580 square foot Technomarine Building at 2919 Biscayne Boulevard, which will
remain. The development plan for the project includes the 30,430 sq. ft. of office
and 10,150 sq. ft. of retail in the Technomarine Building.
• Pursuant to Article 9, Section 914, the proposed project is requesting a development
bonus of 51,954.50 square feet of additional floor area, and shall pay into the
Affordable Housing Trust Fund at amount of $12.40 per square foot = $644,235.80.
• It is found that the project is expected to cost approximately $60,384,000, and to
employ approximately 323 workers during construction (FTE-Full Time Employees);
The project will also result in the creation of approximately 15 permanent new jobs
(FTE) and will generate approximately $572,546 annually in tax revenues to the City
(2005 dollars).
• It is found that on October 17, 2005, the Miami -Dade Aviation Department provided
a Height Analysis review of the proposed project and found that it conforms to the
Miami -Dade County Height Zoning Ordinances. However, the analysis indicates that
the structure may impact the Terminal Instrument Procedures for Departure and
Approach on some of the runways at Miami International Airport (MIA). The
proposed building height requires the applicant to file with the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Form 7460-1, "Notice of Proposed Construction Alteration for
Determination of Known Hazards". In addition, construction cranes for this project
exceeding 200 feet in height must be filed using the same form.
• It is found that the Large Scale Development Committee reviewed the project on
October 26, 2005 to address the expressed technical concerns raised at said Large
Scale Development Committee meeting.
• It is found that on October 28, 2005, the City of Miami Public Works Department
provided a review of the project and commented that: Provide verification that the
alleys within the block have been closed and vacated and that platting will not be
required.
• It is found that the proposed project was reviewed for design appropriateness by the
Urban Development Review Board on November 16, 2005, which recommended
Approval (UDRB Reso. 11-16-05-5) with conditions.
• It is found that the proposed project was reviewed by the Internal Design Review
Committee on November 15, 2005, and the following pertinent comments were
made: Context/Urban Design — (a) Please verify the status of the existing 10-ft
public right -of way/alley separating Lots 1-4 and Lots 5-6. The EIW alley currently
appears to be used as a service alley/plaza. The NIS alley appears to be
abandoned, which would require a permit to abandon a public right-of-way and
include a public benefit. (what is the proposed mitigation of public benefit) Will the
proposed driveway be accessible to the public or used for private access to the site?
Page 3 of 6
Please clarify/ label as such; (b) The "tenant storage" spaces on the corners of the
building could be more appropriately utilized with habitable space for tenant use.
Consider relocating the storage areas to a more suitable location within the interior
of the building. (see Pages A-102 through A-104); (c) 291h Terrace should terminate
the vista onto a feature in the building, a corner architectural feature or align with the
proposed driveway; (d) Bring all sidewalk materials over the vehicular entrances to
form a continuous pedestrian surface; Parking Garage/Loading — (a) Incorporate
the required loading spaces so that they are accessed from within the garage and
loading vehicles do not have to reverse to or from the public right of way; (b) The
committee does not support the application of aluminum louvers as a means of
screening parking pedestals. Louvers may be used in some instances in
combination with architectural or landscape solutions. If the idea is to match the
context of the Technomarine building, please replicate the same materials (concrete)
and pattern, louvers may be used to screen the light behind this architectural
application, as a backdrop. Additionally, attention should be paid to line up the
cornice line with the proposed horizontal banding shown on the new building;
Materials - Please detail the aluminum balcony design. Can these either be
transparent or similar to the Technomarine Bldg. carrying materials and patterns?
Landscaping — (a) Please show the palm trees within the plaza extending to
Biscayne in a row. (Shown site plan A-007, not shown in landscape plan LA-01); (b)
The plaza should not include a driveway to Biscayne Boulevard. This severely
impacts the public space and pedestrian realm; (d) The concrete sidewalk along
Biscayne Boulevard should be continued to the face of the building to provide a wide
sidewalk. Awnings or other structure can protrude over this space for definition if
desirable. The Planning Department's review resulted in design modifications that
were then recommended for approval to the Planning Director.
• It is found that per Planning Department comments, the parking pedestal screening
and the aluminum balcony railings shall match the concrete fagade of the
Technomarine Building.
• It is found that on December 5, 2005, the City's Traffic Consultant, URS Corp.,
provided a review (W.O. #128) of the Traffic Impact Analysis submitted by the
applicant and has found the traffic analysis sufficient.
• It is found that Miami -Dade Public Schools provided a revised review of the
proposed project on January 3, 2006. The student population generated by this
development is estimated at 56 students. The schools serving this area of
application are Eneida M. Hartner Elementary (26 students) — 121% Florida
Inventory School Houses (FISH) Capacity with the proposed project; Jose de Diego
Middle (14 students) — 102% FISH; and Booker T. Washington Senior High (16
students) — 70% FISH. Pursuant to the interlocal agreement, only Eneida M.
Hartner Elementary meets review threshold of 115%. As of January 2005, the
Planned Relief School in the area is State School "GG-1 " (for Jose de Diego Middle
School relief with 1,241 student stations) with an Occupancy Date Funding Year of
2006-07. At an average of $6,549 per K-12 student, the total annual operating cost
for the additional students residing in this development, if approved, would total
$366,744. Based on the State's January 2006 student station cost factors, capital
costs for the estimated additional students to be generated by the proposed
development is $924,602,
Page 4 of 6
• It is found that with respect to all additional criteria as specified in Section 1305.2 of
Zoning Ordinance 11000, the proposal has been found to adhere to the following
Design Review Criteria: (1) Site and Urban Planning; (2) Architecture and
Landscape Architecture; (3) Pedestrian Oriented Development; (4) Streets and
Open Space; (5) Vehicular Access and Parking; (6) Screening; (7) Signage and
lighting; (8) Preservation of Natural Features; and (9) Modification of
Nonconformities.
Based on these findings, the Planning Department is recommending approval of
the requested Development Project with the following conditions:
1) Meet all applicable building codes, land development regulations, ordinances
and other laws and pay all applicable fees due prior to the issuance of a building permit
including the required Affordable Housing Trust fund contribution of $12.40 per square
foot for any applicable FAR increase sought under those provisions.
2) Allow the Miami Police Department to conduct a security survey, at the option
of the Department, and to make recommendations concerning security measures and
systems; further submit a report to the Planning Department, prior to commencement of
construction, demonstrating how the Police Department recommendations, if any, have
been incorporated into the PROJECT security and construction plans, or demonstrate to
the Planning Director why such recommendations are impractical.
3) Obtain approval from, or provide a letter from the Department of Fire -Rescue
indicating APPLICANT'S coordination with members of the Fire Plan Review Section at
the Department of Fire -Rescue in the review of the scope of the PROJECT, owner re-
sponsibility, building development process and review procedures, as well as specific
requirements for fire protection and life safety systems, exiting, vehicular access and
water supply.
4) Obtain approval from, or provide a letter of assurance from the Department of
Solid Waste that the PROJECT has addressed all concerns of the said Department prior
to the obtainment of a shell permit.
5) Comply with the Minority Participation and Employment Plan (including a Con-
tractor/Subcontractor Participation Plan) submitted to the City as part of the Application
for Development Approval, with the understanding that the APPLICANT must use its
best efforts to follow the provisions of the City's Minority/Women Business Affairs and
Procurement Program as a guide.
6) Record the following in the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, prior to
the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Occupancy, a
Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions providing that the ownership, operation and
maintenance of all common areas and facilities will be by the property owner or a man-
datory property owner association in perpetuity.
7) Prior to the issuance of a shell permit, provide the City with a recorded copy of
the MUSP permit resolution and development order, and further, an executed, record
able unity of title or covenant in lieu of unity of title agreement for the subject property;
said agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney's Office.
Page 5 of 6
8) Provide the Planning Department with a temporary construction plan that in-
cludes the following: a temporary construction parking plan, with an enforcement policy;
a construction noise management plan with an enforcement policy; and a maintenance
plan for the temporary construction site; said plan shall be subject to the review and ap-
proval by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of any building permits and
shall be enforced during construction activity. All construction activity shall remain in full
compliance with the provisions of the submitted construction plan; failure to comply may
lead to a suspension or revocation of this Major Use Special Permit.
9) In so far as this Major Use Special Permit includes the subordinate approval of
a series of Class I Special Permits for which specific details have not yet been devel-
oped or provided, the applicant shall provide the Planning Department with all subordi-
nate Class 1 Special Permit plans and detailed requirements for final review and ap-
proval of each one prior to the issuance of any of the subordinate approvals required in
order to carry out any of the requested activities and/or improvements listed in this de-
velopment order or captioned in the plans approved by it.
10) If the project is to be developed in phases, the Applicant shall submit an in-
terim plan, including a landscape plan, which addresses design details for the land oc-
cupying future phases of this Project in the event that the future phases are not devel-
oped, said plan shall include a proposed timetable and shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Director.
11) Pursuant to design related comments received by the Planning Director, the
applicant shall meet the following conditions: (a) NE 29th Terrace should terminate the
vista onto a feature in the building, a corner architectural feature or align with the pro-
posed driveway; (b) Bring all sidewalk materials over the vehicular entrances to form a
continuous pedestrian surface; (c) Design the palm trees within the plaza extending to
Biscayne in a row; (d) The plaza should not include a driveway to Biscayne Boulevard
as this severely impacts the public space and pedestrian realm; (e) The concrete side-
walk along Biscayne Boulevard should be continued to the face of the building to pro-
vide a wide sidewalk. Awnings or other structure can protrude over this space for defini-
tion if desirable; (f) the parking pedestal louver screening and the aluminum balcony rail-
ings will match the concrete facade of the Technomarine Building in color and pattern —
not material.
12) A development bonus to permit a mixed use of 51,954.50 square feet of floor
area shall require payment to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund of an amount of
$12.40 per square foot = $644,235.80.
13) Within 90 days of the effective date of this Development Order, record a
certified copy of the Development Order specifying that the Development Order runs
with the land and is binding on the Applicant, its successors, and assigns, jointly or
severally.
Page 6 of 6